skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> the censorship apologists in HN's usual go-to argument

Please don't make spurious generalizations like this one, which is obviously false. Instead, please familiarize yourself (I don't mean you personally, but all of us) with the cognitive biases that lead to these false feelings of generality [1]. Yes, a lot of people make the argument you're mentioning—and a lot of people also make the opposite argument. I don't know if it's evenly split (no one knows that), but it's close enough not to matter.

It's important that this community get educated about this so we don't tear ourselves apart—which is what the fantasy of being an embattled minority, surrounded by enemies and demons [2, 3], will lead to. In reality, there's a range of views here, more or less homomorphic to the range in society at large. That's what any sufficiently large population sample converges to.

[1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

[2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23308098
Yeah, as a completely disinterested party, I'm entirely unclear as to what legal obligations a middleman like robinhood could be under to prevent them from allowing parties to buy/sell stock on their platform. I think they owe a much greater burden of transparency if they want to convince the neutral, educated who don't have a personal stake in the issue that they didn't manipulate the market (illegally?).
The fact that this margin call happened at the bottom, but this user likely could not have closed their position themselves 15 minutes earlier at a better price, seems like it should be illegal if it is not already.
That's my point exactly.

Traditional stock market buys tons of coinbase cash -> coinbase uses said cash to market-buy BTC with bots driving the price up -> BTC/their crypto of choice is now worth far more.

If the market follows their run they end up making far more than they reinvested.
Great writeup on how to do a black box "cold-boot stepping attack" (https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/woot17/woot17...) on an encrypted HDD. This is why the recommendation is to use encrypted filesystems rather than relying on the obscure hardware device to do FDE securely. Which might seem obvious to most readers here, but I guess that self-encrypting hard disks are highly marketable.
It's belief in the lack of a supernatural deity.

Subtle difference, as required by the topic.
So it looks similar to AWS Systems Manager, but only for Windows and Linux in GCP. In their Youtube video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeaA66WUaaM&feature=youtu.be they're saying however you're doing "patch compliance" whether it's orchestration or by-hand it is still essentially being done incrementally by hand possibly one package at a time. So instead of using Terraform/Ansible/Vagrant to connect to GCP you can use their VM manager to perform bulk updating of OS packages. Their VM manager relies on agent software to connect directly to your VM to issue system commands via your OS native console.
I can't help but facepalm that people are genuinely encouraging one another to buy a stock that is so obviously overvalued, and then hold it at that price as long as possible...

there are not many guarantees in trading, but that is a guarantee to lose money. and because it's under the guise of "sticking it to the man" people have become even less rational about their money.

so when the stock eventually corrects to where it belongs for a dying retailer selling physical media in the digital age... I can only imagine the millions "surprised pikachu face" that will ensue
Apparently his reputation is shot. His "news" is disinformation.

https://blog.robinhood.com/news/2021/1/28/an-update-on-marke...
> SEC net capital obligations

They have to meet certain governmental guidelines on deposits vs asset price risk.

> clearinghouse deposits

Clearing members have to deposit money into clearinghouses as insurance in case a firm goes under.
Can you describe what motivated you to build an ebook reader for the browser, when multiple free desktop and mobile book readers exist?

Also, do I need to keep the screen open if I want to save my place in my book? It doesn't seem to save my book or my location when I reload the page.
RH is a business and can make their own decisions. If you are not happy with how they service you as a client, you can take them to court. They do not owe you anything more than what's in the contract you have with them.
Android isn't the largest share of smart phone users in the US, and it's still 5 stars on the iOS app store.
After a quick search, I see neither rr nor Pernosco on this list, so it's not targeted at people like me.

After a slower read through, it's really not targeted at people like me (despite using many of the things listed.)

After reading the methodology at the end, it's unclear who this could be targeting correctly.
>Unless you're talking about buying on margin

I can assure you, there was a lot of margin purchases happening.
Totally agree. The annotations basically just mark code. Things like AspectJ can then place side-effects around marked (and unmarked!) code.

Also, coming across transient runtime errors because you use multi-catch (a basic Java language feature) and some java library that injects bytecode is pretty lame. All the benefits of a typed+compiled language with all the benefits of monkey patching!
The perils of direct democracy and individuals making decisions.

We need an elite group of ultra wealthy individuals and politicians to protect us from ourselves.
so replace it with a bomb that has a 1/1000000 chance of going off over the cars average lifespan. Seems like you're just arguing semantics. It's a pointless regression in safety
I have serious question to you and everyone who try to advocate for SSPL. Don't you understand that this license has clause for SaaS providers that impossible to comply with?

Even if Amazon wanted to open source every single line of their own AWS code under AGPLv3 or APLv2 it's still not enough: the license require everything to be published under SSPL in very fuzzy terms that can even apply to OS kernel.

Even copyleft licenses always had a goal to increase amount of copyleft code, but SSPL only goal is to completely ban 3rd-party SaaS from using said software.
Shill.

Still waiting for you to answer for a quote you have made up[0]:

> most short positions are actually held by retail investors

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25947119
The class action lawsuits out of this are going to be amazing to watch. Once the announcement was made, how many sales were done in response, which has now blown everything even further into unknown territory?
Recommendation for a serious broker?
While watchmaking has enjoyed great reneissance lately, I find it curious that full-sized clockmaking still seems pretty dead field, at least comparatively. There is no popular reimagings of grandfather clocks or other household timepieces like there are watches.
>Yet Melvin Capital has already closed its position in GME [5], which means that they no longer have a vested interest in the performance of GME.

Melvin Capital also said a day earlier that they do not give out comments on their positions and trading.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-melvin-fund-evotec-de-idU...

Since the claim that they closed their position in itself would potentially influence the market to their benefit, I don't see a reason to trust their statement.
Do they have any sort of moat, though? What stops Fidelity or Schwab from hiring 10 iPhone devs and making their app just as fun and easy to use?
>I actually buy the reasoning behind it - but putting out a corporate speak like this instead of trying to emotionally relate to upset users? Smh

Their reasoning makes no sense. If someone isn't buying on margin, who are they protecting exactly? Citadel and Melvin Capital, that's who. The funds weren't "protected", were they?
As the post says, "We stand in support of our customers".

People who buy and sell stock on Robinhood don't pay them anything, it's the market makers that pay them.

In this case, the adage is true "You're not the customer, you're the product"...
A glimpse into the wardrobe of King David and King Solomon, 3000 years ago
Alright, I didn't know that. It does sound like a bad deal. Imagine if a bank suddenly changed the terms of your mortgage and repossessed the house. You're literally borrowing money from them after all.
Is this also the guy behind Modernist Cuisine?
Robinhood doesn't make money on trades - they make money off of commisions paid to them by high frequency traders. Basically there's some time between when I place an order and when a stock actually gets purchased. In that time, the price may change a bit. High frequency traders can buy at slightly lower prices than I could, and can sell at slightly higher prices than I could, so they can profit the difference without me noticing. Some of this excess gets paid to robinhood as a sort of finders fee.

Over many stocks and long periods of time, this works quite well. However the system breaks down if everyone is trying to buy the same heavily manipulated stock.
After so many months, I had no idea what tools I was running in that command line... And therefore, the effect of any signal seemed far more dangerous to me, than extracting the actual command from my shell's memory.
StartupStarter TV
Hello HN, join us in welcoming the future of entrepreneurship with the launch of StartupStarter and StartupStarter TV.

Satisfaction guaranteed. Find out more here: https://startupstarter.co
Then why not do what TD did and restrict buying on margin? Why tell everyone on your platform that a "stock isn't supported"?
Do you see anything wrong with that?
Justin's "tip" was incorrect and he's spreading disinformation.

"To be clear, this was a risk-management decision, and was not made on the direction of the market makers we route to." - Robinhood[0]

[0]https://blog.robinhood.com/news/2021/1/28/an-update-on-marke...
Circuit breakers have clearly defined limits with known actions. This doesn't seem like that.
Deep into the SunBurst Attack
Why would it make me think any different? She's right.
This is extremely suspect. If you take my money, and give me a share, in theory I should be the only one exposed to a loss (assuming no leverage). Unless you're doing something else with my money or my shares.

I'm sure many people are buying on leverage, but that doesn't explain why they can't just limit margin buying vs preventing any purchase of the stock.
> “I think that, in general, when we evaluate how we would manage through a situation where you see a significant run-up in a stock not based on news, not based on fundamentals"

'Fundamentals' is certainly a euphemism.
> Isn't this pretty much a major component of their intended purpose?

Reminds me of the scene in the The Big Short where the hot chick in the pool who currently works for the SEC (at the time) is in town in Vegas for a conference hoping to run into some Wall Street banker dudes so she can schmooze and float her resume to them. And it's not a conflict of interest.
What do zoom calls have to do with eating poorly and drinking more? What does it have to do with not sleeping?

Go to the office if you want (to be "by yourself"? a bit weird but whatever) and let your coworker stay home if they prefer that.

Sounds like your problems are caused by something a bit more profound than a few zoom calls a day.
I've had good experiences with TD and Fidelity.
A stock is worth what people will pay for it. That’s it. Sure, there are models you can use to come up with a seemingly reasonable valuation, but that’s just a tool you use to make a wild ass guess.
^ Note that this was actually published yesterday (Wednesday) afternoon so the intent was there long in advance of the "outages" this morning.

It's also why "collusion" between brokers will be a challenge because you don't need collusion if everyone knows the exchange itself supports the idea. Then it's just a matter of timing which doesn't have to be perfect.
At least you're original.

Do you want a change in this society? I'd guess you do, most people want to change something. Espousing a desire for any change will always be offensive to someone, and so wanting any improvement necessarily includes being deliberately offensive. The right to speak is the right to offend.

Real world violence, sure. Let's ban that. And asking people to be nice, that's not a bad thing. And banning name calling in your private forum to promote substantiative discussion, that's probably a good idea. But deciding what unappetizing ideas are allowed and are not allowed to be discussed is a bad idea, I thought we learned that lesson in the last century. Free speech isn't what leads to fascist dictatorship, control of ideas does.

All this and I just want to remind you that we are discussing a web site using "white supremacist Nazis" as a pretext to prevent people from organizing against wall street hedge funds.
They literally barred everyone from buying under any circumstance.
> The social movement is honorable

I’m gonna disagree. The entire “social movement” seems to be little more than the same tired old cliches and hysterics about “speculators”.

The main grievance is basically that short selling is bad. Despite academic finance, finding again and again that short selling meaningfully improves price efficiency and protects ordinary investors from bubbles and mania.[1][2]

Again and again corporate executives use the scapegoat of short sellers and speculators to shift the blame from their own mismanagement. GameStop is no different, and it’s certainly not the short sellers that caused it to have a dying business model that’s hemorrhaging money.

[1]https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03784...
[2] https://academic.oup.com/rfs/article-abstract/24/3/821/15904...
flashing high/low/high/low means "your high beams are on" but you can take away their night vision.

flashing on/off/on/off means "turn on your headlights" or
"speed trap ahead"
> They immediately hedge it

This assumes continuous liquidity. Dangerous assumption to make in choppy markets.

It is not uncommon for markets to gap up or down discontinuously. You look at the market and see bid 899 at 901, buy some shares for 898, offer them at 890 and find the market is now 125 at 901.
I just ran through a thought experiment--if Google (gmail) Apple (my phone) and Tmobile (the current owners of my number) all simultaneously nuked me, could I recover?

Luckily yes. Online access would be hindered, but nearly all my financial resources are handled through a local credit union.
A great app means nothing in the face of treating your users with blatant contempt.

RHs told it's users 'you are our product. Do as you are told.'

People are not as stupid as they're made out to be and they have some self respect and dignity.

RH has mortally wounded itself.
Now that’s a name I haven’t heard in a long time.
Dead at the moment. Tamale King 1, space ballers 0.
Ok, as a customer why is that my problem? They’re not providing the service they promised. This is absurd.
I could buy it if they decided to halt trading on those securities, but they only halted buying.
> * If you clearly state that you won't accept PRs and somebody still sends them, then you can close them right away and problem solved. Am I missing anything?*

I don't want to have to set up an auto-close bot when I should be able to just untick a checkbox in the project's settings.

I don't want to have to click through PR notifications and manually close them when I should be able to just untick a checkbox in the project's settings.
How is she keeping him accountable by refusing to work with him? This seems wrong on 2 ways:

- It encourages others to do the same; someone doesn't agree with you on an important issue (pro life?) - just refuse to work with them. This furthers the divide in US politics and is (imo) an overall negative.

- It hurts her own cause by removing support she already has - is this what a representative is supposed to do?
This makes me uneasy. The fact that there will be regulatory investigations should also concern you since a solution like this could easily be implicated in misleading retail investors.

Simple string matching isn't going to cut it, you really need a decent NLP based implementation. There should be weighing mechanisms to avoid bots surfacing stocks that don't actually represent the interest of WSB. The site should be crystal clear about the time period this is sourced from. And most importantly, please put a disclaimer about what it is, how it's working, and why it shouldn't be considered financial advice.
Thank you for your kind words. The funny thing is that I am not a sysadmin - or maybe I am one in spirit :-)
um, buying stocks is not a scheme to manipulate the price. However disabling purchases of a stock for millions of users does artificially suppress demand.

Also robinhood doesn't allow selling naked options so that entire point of yours is moot.
Can someone clarify whether RH blocks margin purchases (in other words, just refuses to lend people money to purchase those stocks), or blocks outright cash purchases?

The former would be entirely understandable and justifiable, the latter not so much.
Fidelity at least still allowed trading GME. I assume most brokers did.
Also in the event that everything is true and straightforward, why wouldn't they say that at the start (and through the whole day)
I really appreciate the big "Reject All" button for cookies consent as opposed to all the irritating dark patterns most websites seem to use where if you don't want to "Accept All", you're forced to drill down into submenus to disable every type of cookie individually. Thanks for not being subhuman garbage.
Indeed... in Java this is reasonably clear, but I've never found I have a problem in C++. I suppose if you're inheriting from your template argument and you template on an int? Seems awfully contrived and useless though.
I am not a shill, I am a real person and here is my blog. https://joelx.com/
Lots of big funds trading back and forth to depress the price it would seem. Look at the bid/ask volume. Looks like a ladder attack.
but the actions were taken against all buy orders, not only buys on margin.
Wrong because RobinHood is paid handsomely by the shorts.
> I learned C# in under a day by using ReSharper and reading a few articles about C# idioms and memory management.

did that include reflection ? P/Invoke, and support for native pointers ? async/await and coroutines ? differences between structs and classes ? how generics are implemented ?
As a related tool, there is Altair (https://altair-viz.github.io/), which also implements the Grammar of Graphics as well as a Grammar of Interaction.
Sure, but why are they using that as an explanation for shutting down all trading, including that not on margin?
I am imagining their platform isn't that robust and it was the easiest way they had to shut it down temporarily.
Better question: Do you see anything right with that?
Maybe not. But that doesn't make this news.

RH is getting sued for market manipulation. This is the inevitable result from that. RH may very well be guilty in all of this, but not for these margin calls.
I don't understand all the kerfuffle.

I'm from EU and was looking into investing earlier into Nasdaq symbols, iow before my bank decides to bother letting me pick some crumbs from their plate.

So I look around and I figure that what you can do on these online trading platform is to buy some glass-beads from them that happen to correspond to IRL stocks. IOW, these folks are data-mining user sentiment to place orders while offloading risk.

Isn't it the same with RH? Aren't they just saying "you can play along, just not with these beads. Too risky for us." Or is RH a straightforward stock broker?
I would be rather surprised if there are serious hedge funds that buy stock using Robinhood’s backend.
Robinhood CEO on Today's Developments
> limited buys of these securities

People invest due to variety of reasons. Speculation, undervalue, overvalued, etc. This does not seem like an open market if people cannot buy and sell at their own risk.

Sudden changes to what is allowed in the market could also cause some unknown shift to how it works. If things are let to be, at least, at some time, things will settle down ... whether that takes a few days, weeks, years, decades. I think that is how the market works. There appears to be added controlling factors into the market.

I would rather be with a brokerage where I can make my own decisions. Not one that suddenly controls what can and cannot be done.

TD & Robinhood restricts certain trades:
https://www.cnet.com/personal-finance/robinhood-app-td-ameri...
Exactly. I think gold is worthless because it's just a lump of metal that doesn't do anything useful. But apparently there's enough people that like shiny metal and therefore it's worth a lot. GME might just be an aesthetic purchase more than anything.
It's not just about that, though. I want to avoid crushing people's hopes, yes, but in the event that they are absolutely set on submitting a PR, I don't want to have to deal with getting a notification and having to manually close it. (And no, I don't want to take the time to set up a bot to do it either. I have better things to do with my time.)
> Let's say that some paradigm insists that inheritance should be used for every problem.

There is no such paradigm, including and specially OO.

In fact, your example clearly illustrates the perils of blaming the tools for problems caused by incompetence.

I mean, how many decades have passed since "composition over inheritance" has been taught like a mantra in every OO programming 101 course?

And still the best OO example you could manage to come up wit is a blatant error that would lead you to fail a OO programming 101 course?

I'll restate the obvious: the reason why bad code is bad is not because it's OO, it's because it's bad code.

And here you are, trying to pass blatantly bad code as somehow an OO problem?
Just like "we are bullshitting but look at our smile". And there is a way to present a facet of the reality while clouding another one so I'm not saying their message is a complete lie, it's just taken from a controlled perspective.
If more people had a 20 minute bike commute, we'd all be much better off. Unfortunately, far more people are facing the prospect of returning to 60+ minute driving commutes, which are hell.
> Unless you're talking about buying on margin, there's no risk that you'd have to absorb any loss for someone who just buys a share of the stock through you with their own cash.

The thing is, clearing houses expect collateral up front.

It's not a risk issue between Robinhood and its clients, its a risk issue between the clearing house and Robinhood.

I'm not saying that this what actually happened, I'm just saying that the presented argument has plausible elements.
If they were smart, they'd price it like at 2 dollars a share
Reminded me of the tool turning Pocketbook E-Ink readers into computer monitors, which I made several years ago:

https://github.com/borzunov/remoteink

This could also be used for the dashboards if connected to a remote server or a Raspberry Pi (no screen updates happen if the content doesn't change).

Besides that, it allows to zoom in/out, switch between the opened windows, and move around the screen with keyboard shortcuts. No jailbreak is needed for the reader.
The same reason it didn't effect Facebook. Ratings don't matter for apps that are already household names. There's also no comparable alternative.
Look at the deadman walking
they are the ones trying to pop the bubble. Stop pretending like RH is trying to protect retail, only institutions are benefiting from this.